The White Sox had a brilliant run in 2005. What made the Giants’ run in 2012 even more improbable was the fact that they won all those games after facing elimination.

]]>4 complete game wins in a row.

ALDS – 27.0 IP, 3.00 ERA, 1.22 WHIP, 14 Ks, 8 BB, 24 Hits. 3-0

ALCS – 45.0 IP, 2.20 ERA, .689 WHIP, 22 Ks, 4 BB, 27 Hits. 4-1

WS – 41.0 IP, 2.63 ERA, 1.12 WHIP, 36 Ks, 17 BB, 29 Hits. 4-0

“Small market” teams get no love. Yankees lost in the divisional series so it wasn’t important anymore.

]]>Just because there are four outcomes does not mean each outcome is equally likely to occur.

]]>In a best-of-7 series, there are 4 possible outcomes: 4-0, 4-1, 4-2, 4-3. If the outcome is random, we’d expect a sweep to happen 25% of the time. 27/158 = 17.1%, which is quite a bit less, which confirms a reasonable expectation that a series between two good teams should be more even than not.

In a best-of-5 series, there 3 possible outcomes: 3-0, 3-1, 3-2. Random outcomes means a sweep 33% of the time. 41/108 is 38.0%, so slightly more than random, which suggests that perhaps the practice of matching the best division winner with a (presumably) worse wild card team leads to more imbalanced series.

Sample sizes aren’t enormous for any of these. Best-of-7 results pass a 5% significance level, but not by a ton, and best-of-5 results don’t come close to passing.

]]>Blech. And you never even compared them with the generic 50% probability, never saying the observed is higher or lower than expected, and never postulated why that would be. ]]>